Hello
I am currently testing the PDM, and I am encountering a major problem: how to manage a pneumatic cylinder - a validated library element - when it is flexible in my assembly?
As soon as the cylinder is activated, the PDM asks me to extract it. It doesn't make sense, because it's always the same article... So I'm probably missing something, but what???
Thank you in advance for your help,
The solution is surely in the use of an advanced constraint such as "limit the distance" by entering two values to limit the distance (minimum value and maximum value). And then your cylinder must be flexible in your main assembly.
This allows you to have a rod that can walk only the value of the actual stroke. This means that you have to add a constraint to your assembly if you want to get a precise position. (NB: The assembly will be constrained if your position is incompatible with the set stroke.)
At our house we also add configurations for the two extreme positions (exit rod and retracted rod). (and quite often intermediate positions if necessary).
Nb1: it is possible that PDM asks to extract the file even using this type of constraint because in practice SW recalculates a position of the actuator according to what the assembly requires (so the actuator assembly should be modified). The fact of not extracting/archiving the cylinder should not really pose a problem, with the possible exception of a request for extraction which must be ignored.
Nb2: avoid having the same cylinder twice in the same assembly with different stroke outputs (it smells like a guaranteed bug on one of the two instances)
has
Hello
Thank you for this feedback!
For the config ("limit distance" constraint + open-closed-free configurations), that's exactly what I'm using, so we'll continue like this.
I think it's a shame that the PDM asks to extract the file, because it's not the case with the Autodesk solution... I just have to change my habits: I'm going to ignore the extraction request according to your advice.
Have a nice day!
Interesting little thing, make the components of the actuator (body+rod) virtual, that's 2 less files to manage.
On the other hand, I don't have any experience on the cohabitation of virtual components and PDM, so I should be tested.
@stefbeno
All our sub-assemblies are managed virtually (this makes it much easier to copy assemblies and lightens the storage tree).
This does not really pose any problems except:
EPDM does not know how to manage the use cases of components by virtual assemblies natively (you can have a use case via a specific query to be created in the "report generator")
On some files, EPDM does not read the inside of virtual subassemblies well -> so the specific query does not work on these files. There are few files affected by this bug. It is often possible to remedy this bug when it is detected by renaming the virtual file (renaming the file forces EPDM to "rescan" it during archiving, which is usually enough to solve the problem)